0
0 A bill to allow persons with dual citizenship to hold public office, laid in parliament for consideration, has reopened a debate that strikes at the very heart of sovereignty, loyalty, and institutional maturity. This conversation must be had, but it must be had wisely.
Ghana is not hostile to dual citizenship. Far from it. Dual nationality has long been part of our national fabric, and it has brought immense value. Ghanaians living abroad and those who hold additional passports have returned with global exposure, technical expertise, investment capital, and administrative competence to support national development across sectors from finance and health to diplomacy, technology, and public administration
But, of all the countries in the world, Ghana is part of the 49% that allows dual citizenship. With that said, some of these countries have limits to what a dual citizen can become in their country. Those without the limits have strict naturalisation laws and requirements. Ghana falls within those with limits on what one can become.
Our history proves this openness.
We witnessed this prominently under the administration of John Agyekum Kufuor and more recently during the tenure of Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo. No one has ever stopped capable Ghanaians with other nationalities from contributing to national development.
Some dual citizens served in high-level government roles as advisors and heads of state institutions. Ghana has never blocked its global citizens from contributing. I am confident there are dual citizenship holders currently serving in John Mahama’s administration.
And it should never stop. However, openness does not mean recklessness. In every serious state, there are lines drawn around sovereign-sensitive offices.
What the Ghanaian Constitution Already Protects
The framers of our democracy understood something timeless: allegiance must never be divided at the very top of state power. That is why the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, 1992 provides explicit safeguards.
The Presidency — Article 62(1)(a) “A person shall not be qualified for election as President of Ghana unless he is a citizen of Ghana by birth.” Because the Commander-in-Chief must have only one unquestionable loyalty Ghana.
Parliament -Article 94(2)(a)
“A person shall not be qualified to be a Member of Parliament if he owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana.” Any allegiance elsewhere disqualifies you. Ghana’s constitutional architecture is not accidental. It is deliberate.
These two clauses alone reveal the spirit of Ghana’s constitutional thinking :
Leadership at the heart of state power demands exclusive national loyalty. And it is within this same spirit that other highly sensitive offices exist under constitutional authority, including:
Chief of Defence Staff & Service Chiefs
Inspector General of Police
Ambassadors & High Commissioners
Secretary to the Cabinet (executive authority under the Presidency)
While the Constitution appoints these roles through executive power, their nature is inseparable from national security, diplomacy, and sovereignty. No serious state treats them casually.
Dual Citizenship Has Always Served Ghana With Limits
Let us be clear and fair. Dual citizenship is not the enemy. It has strengthened Ghana. Our diaspora has powered investment, strengthened institutions, improved governance practices, and elevated Ghana’s global profile. In business, medicine, academia, development work, technology, and even government administration, dual citizens have played transformative roles.
Restrictions on a few sensitive offices do not erase this contribution. They simply protect the core of the state. And that protection is both reasonable and patriotic.
Why Comparing Ghana to Europe Is Misleading
Some argue that Europe and other advanced democracies allow dual citizens to hold high public office so Ghana should follow. But this comparison ignores a fundamental truth: Europe’s political stability rests on centuries of strong institutions, deep-rooted accountability systems, independent justice structures, and mature anti-corruption safeguards.
Ghana is still building hers. This is not an insult to our democracy it is honesty.
Until our institutions are strong enough to manage conflicts of interest swiftly, enforce accountability without fear or favour, and secure the state against sophisticated political and financial misconduct, divided allegiance at the highest levels of power is a risk we cannot afford.
Accountability, Extradition, and National Security
There is also the uncomfortable but necessary question of enforcement. What happens when a dual citizen occupying a sensitive office compromises Ghana’s national interest and escapes to their second country, especially one without an extradition agreement? How does Ghana compel justice? Even those with an extradition agreement, the host country can decline Ghana’s request.
Sovereignty without enforceable accountability becomes ceremonial. The higher the office, the greater the risk and the greater the need for exclusive national loyalty.
The Global Reality: Many Countries Draw the Same Lines
Across the world, states quietly acknowledge that dual allegiance becomes dangerous at the highest levels of power. For example:
The United States restricts its presidency to citizens by birth and limits sensitive security clearances. Japan requires renunciation of other citizenships for naturalisation. The Netherlands generally withdraws citizenship when another is acquired.
Singapore and China do not recognise dual citizenship.
Several African states, including Rwanda and Kenya, allow dual nationality but restrict access to certain sensitive public offices. Even where dual citizenship exists, limitations almost always follow. Why? Because nations understand that loyalty cannot be split when sovereignty is at stake.
Citizenship, Conflict, and National Interest
Dual citizens swear allegiance to two sovereign states. In moments of diplomatic tension, military conflict, economic sanctions, or strategic negotiations where interests clash, no statute can regulate the human instinct of loyalty. History teaches that when national interests collide, divided allegiance becomes a vulnerability. This is precisely why sensitive offices across the world remain guarded.
Public Office Is Service, Not Convenience
Serving in Ghana’s highest offices is not an entitlement. It is a sacred trust. Anyone who seeks to lead Ghana at the pinnacle of state power must be willing to hold one allegiance to Ghana alone. If one cannot relinquish other nationalities for the honour of such service, that choice is valid, but leadership at that level must then belong to those whose loyalty is undivided. That is not discrimination. That is patriotism.
A Wise Balance for a Developing Democracy
This balance has served us well. To dismantle it prematurely in the name of modernity would be to trade caution for risk. Perhaps in the future, when institutions are exceptionally strong, corruption safeguards airtight, accountability swift, and national security systems fully resilient, this debate can be reopened. But today, wisdom must prevail over haste.
Dual citizenship has always been part of Ghana’s progress story, and it should remain so. But safeguarding the highest offices of the state is not backwardness. It is responsible governance. Restrictions on sensitive national positions are fair.
They are prudent and patriotic. A nation that fails to protect the core of its sovereignty eventually loses control of its destiny. Ghana must remain open but never naïve. One country. One sovereignty. One undivided allegiance at the helm.
